You could use @corresp on <idno> for the private uri scheme version.
I wonder if <idno> should be a member of att.canonical?
Cheers,
Martin
On 2018-05-31 07:06 AM, Syd Bauman wrote:
> I'm of two minds about this. The problem is that the content of
> <idno> is *not* defined as a URI. Thus, the "normal" way I would
> suggest this be done:
> <prefixDef ident="isn" matchPattern="(.*)" replacementPattern="http://isni.org/isni/$1"/>
> <!-- ... -->
> <idno type="ISN">isn:0000000083391828</idno>
> is a bit weird, because <prefixDef> is for URIs, not textual
> content. But here the content of <idno> does happen to be a URI.
>
> But it's not as though there is some generic TEI software you can
> install which will process <prefixDef> for all your URIs which would
> fail to work on an <idno>. (Not because it would not fail to work on
> an <idno>, but because there is no such software. If I were to write
> it someday, in which case I would probably provide a switch for
> processing <idno>s or not.)
>
> So in truth, Kevin's suggestion is probably safer.
> Sigh.
>
> P.S. Note that the prefix ("isn:") has to be lower case. (I forget
> which RFC recommends lower case, but <prefixDef> requires it.)
>
>> I recommend replacing:
>> <idnotype="ISN">ISN:0000000083391828</idno>
>> with this:
>> <idnotype="ISN">http://isni.org/isni/0000000083391828</idno>
>> which follows the URI syntax prescribed at
>> http://www.isni.org/how-isni-works .